Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Addition of single iteration Patatrack and LST HLT configurations and workflows #46828

Merged

Conversation

VourMa
Copy link
Contributor

@VourMa VourMa commented Nov 29, 2024

PR description

This is a procModifier-based implementation of LST in HLT. It reuses the trackingLST procModifier to enable LST track building, and it introduces a new one, seedingLST, which is not too useful for the HLT currently but it may become useful also for the offline setup in the near future.

Another modifier, singleIterPatatrack is introduced and it allows HLT to run only one iteration of tracking based on Patatrack pixel seeds. It works both with CKF and with LST building (when combined with the procModifier above).

Three new variations of the HLT timing workflow are also added (single iteration, single iteration LST, LST).

The most important results have been summarized in this presentation.

Instructions on how to run
cmsrel CMSSW_14_2_0_pre4
cd CMSSW_14_2_0_pre4/src
cmsenv
git cms-init
git cms-addpkg Configuration HLTrigger
git remote add SegLink [email protected]:SegmentLinking/cmssw.git
git fetch SegLink
git checkout CMSSW_14_2_0_pre4_singleIter_LST_HLT
scram b -j 16

# Rerun L1, needed because the HLT samples I am using are produced with 14_0_X
cmsDriver.py Phase2 -s L1,L1TrackTrigger \
--conditions auto:phase2_realistic_T33 \
--geometry ExtendedRun4D110 \
--era Phase2C17I13M9 \
--eventcontent FEVTDEBUGHLT \
--datatier GEN-SIM-DIGI-RAW-MINIAOD \
--customise SLHCUpgradeSimulations/Configuration/aging.customise_aging_1000,Configuration/DataProcessing/Utils.addMonitoring,L1Trigger/Configuration/customisePhase2FEVTDEBUGHLT.customisePhase2FEVTDEBUGHLT,L1Trigger/Configuration/customisePhase2TTOn110.customisePhase2TTOn110 \
--filein /store/mc/Phase2Spring24DIGIRECOMiniAOD/TT_TuneCP5_14TeV-powheg-pythia8/GEN-SIM-DIGI-RAW-MINIAOD/PU200_AllTP_140X_mcRun4_realistic_v4-v1/2560000/11d1f6f0-5f03-421e-90c7-b5815197fc85.root \
--fileout file:output_Phase2_L1T.root \
--inputCommands="keep *, drop l1tPFJets_*_*_*, drop l1tTrackerMuons_l1tTkMuonsGmt*_*_HLT" \
--outputCommands="drop l1tTrackerMuons_l1tTkMuonsGmt*_*_HLT" \
--mc -n 100 --nThreads 10

# Rerun L1 emulator + HLT (needed for any sample)
# In terms of procModifiers:
#    None -> Legacy seeding, CKF building
#    alpaka -> Patatrack seeding
#    singleIterPatatrack -> Single iteration tracking
#    trackingLST -> LST building for the initialStep
#    seedingLST -> LST seeding for the hightPtTripletStep
cmsDriver.py Phase2 -s L1P2GT,HLT:75e33 --processName=HLTX \
--conditions auto:phase2_realistic_T33 \
--geometry ExtendedRun4D110 \
--era Phase2C17I13M9 \
--eventcontent FEVTDEBUGHLT \
--customise SLHCUpgradeSimulations/Configuration/aging.customise_aging_1000 \
--filein file:output_Phase2_L1T.root \
--fileout file:Phase2_L1P2GT_HLT.root \
--inputCommands="keep *, drop *_hlt*_*_HLT, drop triggerTriggerFilterObjectWithRefs_l1t*_*_HLT" \
--outputCommands='keep *_*InitialStepTrack*LST*_*_*, keep *_*HighPtTripletStepTrack*_*_*' \
-n 100 --nThreads 10 \
--procModifiers alpaka,trackingLST,seedingLST

cmsDriver.py DQM -s VALIDATION:hltMultiTrackValidation \
--conditions auto:phase2_realistic_T33 \
--geometry ExtendedRun4D110 \
--era Phase2C17I13M9 \
--datatier DQMIO \
--eventcontent DQM \
--filein file:Phase2_L1P2GT_HLT.root \
--hltProcess HLTX \
--fileout DQM.root \
-n 100 --nThreads 10

cmsDriver.py HARVEST -s HARVESTING:@trackingOnlyValidation+@trackingOnlyDQM+postProcessorHLTtrackingSequence \
--filein file:DQM.root \
--scenario pp \
--filetype DQM \
--conditions auto:phase2_realistic_T33 \
--mc -n 100

mv DQM_V0001_R000000001__Global__CMSSW_X_Y_Z__RECO.root configName.root
makeTrackValidationPlots.py configName.root --extended

FYI @slava77 @rovere @lguzzi

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Nov 29, 2024

cms-bot internal usage

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

+code-checks

Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-46828/42842

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

A new Pull Request was created by @VourMa for master.

It involves the following packages:

  • Configuration/ProcessModifiers (operations)
  • Configuration/PyReleaseValidation (upgrade, pdmv)
  • HLTrigger/Configuration (hlt)
  • RecoTracker/LSTCore (reconstruction)

@AdrianoDee, @Martin-Grunewald, @Moanwar, @antoniovilela, @cmsbuild, @davidlange6, @DickyChant, @fabiocos, @jfernan2, @mandrenguyen, @miquork, @mmusich, @rappoccio, @srimanob, @subirsarkar can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@GiacomoSguazzoni, @Martin-Grunewald, @SohamBhattacharya, @VinInn, @VourMa, @dgulhan, @fabiocos, @felicepantaleo, @gpetruc, @makortel, @missirol, @mmusich, @mtosi, @rovere, @silviodonato, @slomeo this is something you requested to watch as well.
@antoniovilela, @mandrenguyen, @rappoccio, @sextonkennedy you are the release manager for this.

cms-bot commands are listed here

@VourMa
Copy link
Contributor Author

VourMa commented Nov 29, 2024

I am not sure whether I should use the procModifiers introduced in this PR always with the alpaka procModifier. Feel free to give feedback on that and I can modify the necessary lines.

@mmusich
Copy link
Contributor

mmusich commented Nov 29, 2024

test parameters:

  • relvals_opt = --what upgrade
  • workflows = 29634.753, 29634.754, 29634.755
  • enable = hlt_p2_integration, hlt_p2_timing

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

+code-checks

Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-46828/42846

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

@mmusich
Copy link
Contributor

mmusich commented Nov 29, 2024

@cmsbuild, please test

@VourMa
Copy link
Contributor Author

VourMa commented Dec 2, 2024

That's the gist of the discussion at #45508 (comment), where we decided to take this approach. Or do I misunderstand?

My point was having about a specific procModifier (e.g. patatrack and not the generic alpaka) to enable specific configurations that potentially change the physics. It's not about procModifiers vs. customizations (that's what the link in the comment points me to), which has been decided upon and is fine (in my opinion).

@mmusich
Copy link
Contributor

mmusich commented Dec 2, 2024

to enable specific configurations that potentially change the physics.

the point here is that the legacy pixel tracking should not really exist in phase-2 (I think that's beyond discussion). I don't see the point of having a patatrack modifier to support a mode that is not envisaged in any possible scenario.

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Dec 2, 2024

+1

Size: This PR adds an extra 60KB to repository
Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-626af6/43196/summary.html
COMMIT: 0f32bd0
CMSSW: CMSSW_15_0_X_2024-12-02-1100/el8_amd64_gcc12
Additional Tests: HLT_P2_INTEGRATION,HLT_P2_TIMING
User test area: For local testing, you can use /cvmfs/cms-ci.cern.ch/week0/cms-sw/cmssw/46828/43196/install.sh to create a dev area with all the needed externals and cmssw changes.

Comparison Summary

Summary:

  • No significant changes to the logs found
  • Reco comparison results: 59 differences found in the comparisons
  • DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 47
  • DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 3597272
  • DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 2524
  • DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 0
  • DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 3594728
  • DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 20
  • DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
  • DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: 0.0 KiB( 46 files compared)
  • Checked 206 log files, 177 edm output root files, 47 DQM output files
  • TriggerResults: found differences in 1 / 45 workflows

@mmusich
Copy link
Contributor

mmusich commented Dec 2, 2024

+hlt

@jfernan2
Copy link
Contributor

jfernan2 commented Dec 3, 2024

+1

@AdrianoDee
Copy link
Contributor

+pdmv

@mmusich
Copy link
Contributor

mmusich commented Dec 3, 2024

@cms-sw/upgrade-l2 can you take a look?

@Moanwar
Copy link
Contributor

Moanwar commented Dec 3, 2024

+Upgrade

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Dec 3, 2024

This pull request is fully signed and it will be integrated in one of the next master IBs (tests are also fine). This pull request will now be reviewed by the release team before it's merged. @sextonkennedy, @mandrenguyen, @rappoccio, @antoniovilela (and backports should be raised in the release meeting by the corresponding L2)

@mandrenguyen
Copy link
Contributor

+1

@cmsbuild cmsbuild merged commit f912613 into cms-sw:master Dec 4, 2024
14 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

7 participants